Legal Opinion

Berthiaume v. Kessler

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided June 29, 1933PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBranch, J.

The defendants contend that a landlord owes to his tenants no duty of protection against dangers inherent in the “type of construction” of those portions of his premises which he furnishes for their common use but retains within his own control, and cite certain cases from Massachusetts and Maine in support of their position. Such is not the law in this jurisdiction. “In so far as the approaches to the premises are concerned, it is his [the landlord’s] duty to do whatever the ordinary man would do to enable them [his tenants] to enter and leave the premises in safety.” Young, J., in Kambour…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Gobrecht v. BeckwithSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1926
  2. Kambour v. Boston & Maine RailroadSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1913
  3. Saad v. PapageorgeSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1926
  4. Thompson v. ResnikSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1932
  5. Burelle v. PienkofskiSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1929

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Papakalos v. ShakaSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1941
  2. McLain v. HaleyNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1949
  3. Oswald v. JerajOhio Supreme Court · 1946
  4. Ahearn v. RouxSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1949
  5. Hill v. GaertnerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1958

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API